Opinion: Rising sea level is gnawing at N.J. coastline

People who want, or need, to remain on the islands, should rebuild their homes to the newer flood standards of 3 feet above base flood elevation

By Barry Chalofsky

Clearly, the biggest impact of Hurricane Sandy was the damage or destruction of homes. Even after two months, thousands of people are still homeless and many properties are destroyed.

Climate change is something that will occur over many years. While we are starting to see the impacts today, the overall changes will be gradual and will occur in fits and starts.

Some years may see a lot of activity, while other years may be relatively quiet. We may not see another storm like Sandy for many years, but we are likely to see more intense nor’easters and other coastal storms.

Each of these storms, as we have seen over the past two months, may bring flooding and damage to different areas of the coast, but may not be the next “big one.” Nevertheless, this gradual battering will leave its mark on New Jersey’s shore.

More ominously, sea levels have risen 16 inches since 1900 and are predicted to continue to rise another 16 inches by 2050 and 43 inches by 2100, says Rutgers’ Anthony Broccoli, who adds, “The ongoing rise in sea level has raised the baseline for coastal flooding from storm surge and the rate of sea level rise will likely accelerate during the remainder of the 21st century.”

Under that scenario, much of the New Jersey coast will be under water by the end of the century.

While 2100 may seem like a long way off, when combined with the increasingly intense storms over the next 87 years, the coast will gradually become an impossible place to live.

According to Megan Linkin, Ph.D., atmospheric perils specialist for Swiss Reinsurance America Corporation, “The National Flood Insurance Program has paid out $33.8 billion in losses since 1978. Five multibillion-dollar losses have occurred since 2001, leaving the NFIP in $18 billion of debt However, the NFIP is without the borrowing capacity to meet potential Sandy-related losses and is dependent on Congress to authorize additional funds.” While we are slowly seeing that aid materialize, given the likelihood of increased disasters nationwide and the continuing problems with the deficit, it is likely that the federal government will not be able to continue to bail out all of the disaster areas nationwide in the future.

The eight-point proposal that I outlined in a previous op-ed (“Sandy’s warning: Climate change is here, now move out of the way,” Nov. 30, 2012) is a long-term solution that requires a number of initiatives and policy changes. Most notably, for existing homeowners, are financial incentives to move off of the barrier islands and resettle farther inland. Since these incentives are not available now, it would be unrealistic to put the financial burden on the existing residents.

At present, only homeowners in high-risk areas with mortgages are required to obtain flood insurance.

There are incentives for homeowners to rebuild to flood standards, but it is not required. Many homeowners without mortgages decided to forgo flood insurance and now face a difficult situation.

While there is certainly a higher upfront cost to rebuilding to flood standards, the benefits in the near term, reduced flooding impacts, should be worth the expense. Therefore, I recommend that people who want, or need, to remain on the islands, should rebuild their homes to the newer flood standards of 3 feet above base flood elevation, regardless whether they have flood insurance.

Unfortunately, people need to realize that this situation is not likely to improve. Many rely on their houses for retirement income or as investments.

If we are unable to stop sea-level increases, regardless of the impacts of future storms, homes in areas that flood repeatedly would lose resale value. While people could enjoy shore properties for the near future, long term they are not likely to survive. Therefore, we would need a massive program to provide financial relief to shore residents to allow them to move out. If left completely to the private markets, many of these properties will simply vanish. More important, the shore economy, which is the third-largest economic driver in New Jersey, would cease to exist.

While we need to help the existing residents cope with the loss of their homes, we must also begin the process of rethinking our coastal resources.

We are just at the beginning of a dialogue – but if we don’t start to seriously address this issue, we will lose our most precious asset and cripple our state’s economy.

Barry Chalofsky, P.P., former chief of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection’s storm water and ground water programs, is an environmental and land-use planning consultant and an adjunct instructor of environmental planning at Rutgers University. Reach him at bchalofassociates.com.